Expert Speak Raisina Debates
Published on Jan 19, 2021
The decisive result of the presidential election — and referendum on 10 January — has provided a temporary relief to the people, businesses, and society in Kyrgyzstan.
Kyrgyzstan embarks on a precarious course In less than 100 days, the political landscape of Kyrgyzstan has undergone a radical transformation, which none of the main actors or political analysts could have visualised. It all began on 4 October 2020, when elections to the 120-member Kyrgyz Parliament were held. Although more than a dozen parties contested the elections, only four parties managed to get votes above the minimum stipulated level of seven percent. Out of these, three pro-government parties accounted for more than 100 seats and only one party which has consistently opposed the government managed to garner 13 seats. This resulted in charges of vote-rigging by the losing parties culminating in violent demonstrations in the capital city Bishkek and some other population centres. Protestors occupied the parliament building and government offices in Bishkek demanding an annulment of the elections. This was done two days later on 6 October 2020.

Although more than a dozen parties contested the elections, only four parties managed to get votes above the minimum stipulated level of seven percent.

From then on, events moved at a blistering pace. Sadyr Japarov, a populist politician who had been imprisoned for 11-and-a-half years on charges of kidnapping a government official in 2013 was set free by a motley crowd of his supporters. Within a week, Japarov was anointed as the Prime Minister and on the resignation of the incumbent President, Sooronbay Jeenbekov, on 15 October, also occupied the position of acting president. But Japarov was not satisfied with this. He had grander designs in mind. These bore fruit with his election as the President with a resounding popular support of 79 percent of votes polled on 10 January 2021, where he contested against 16 other candidates. The success was made even sweeter with an approval by a similar whopping margin in a referendum for a changeover from a semi-parliamentary form of government to a presidential system, which would bestow much greater power to the institution of the president.

Background

The transformation of Kyrgyzstan from an authoritarian state to a semi-parliamentary form of government has been short-lived. It was hoped when the Constitution of Kyrgyzstan was amended in 2010 that democracy would develop strong roots and that Kyrgyzstan’s days of coups and forced change of governments would be over. Sadly, these expectations were misplaced.

Kyrgyzstan is plagued by periodic instability, with no fewer than 14 prime ministers since 2010, and none holding power for longer than two years.

Kyrgyzstan has been heavily impacted by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its economic implications, especially with regard to the poor segment of its population. The substandard health infrastructure and increased corruption during the pandemic made the people yearn for change. The national economy crumbled under rising international debt and a decrease in remittances from Russia and Kazakhstan. Kyrgyzstan is plagued by periodic instability, with no fewer than 14 prime ministers since 2010, and none holding power for longer than two years. An August 2020 opinion poll had highlighted the potential for renewed unrest with 53 percent of respondents believing that the country was heading in the wrong direction — more than at any time since the 2010 revolution. The poll identified the poor state of the economy, the pandemic (which 67 percent believe that the government handled badly), and endemic corruption as the main reasons for rising discontent.

The post 4 October election crisis appeared to be a coup staged by the violent ethnic clans of the north.

The people of Northern Kyrgyzstan are more developed and are dependent on secondary and tertiary sectors as against the population in the largely agrarian south. This long-drawn battle between the politicians of the economically, ideologically and ethnically diverse north and south regions has for decades played a role in Kyrgyzstan politics. The post 4 October election crisis appeared to be a coup staged by the violent ethnic clans of the north.

Recent developments

Following the 4 October parliamentary election, the streets of capital city Bishkek dissolved into chaos as protesters stormed prisons, freeing a number of high-profile inmates, among others, former MP Sadyr Japarov. The prime minister and parliament speaker along with several mayors and governors tendered their resignations. The parliament announced Sadyr Japarov as Prime Minister on 11 October. Three days later, President Jeenbekov announced his resignation, ostensibly to prevent further bloodshed. Immediately thereafter, Japarov was installed as interim President by the parliament until new elections are held. In his short tenure, Japarov (who resigned as interim president on 15 November 2020) introduced measures to reform the constitution, initiated an “economic amnesty” to encourage officials to come clean about corruption, had criminal cases opened and other convictions overturned, put his cronies into positions of power, and seen election dates set and then abruptly canceled — all with scant regard for the rule of law. He made demonstrative moves to tackle corruption, even as he was forced to deny having links to organised crime himself. Significantly, he announced that he will finally solve the problem of corruption that has plagued the country for decades. He took some cosmetic decisions in this regard. Many crucial questions, however, remained unanswered.

Japarov made demonstrative moves to tackle corruption, even as he was forced to deny having links to organised crime himself.

Kyrgyzstan’s constitution forbids a person serving as an acting or interim president from taking part in a presidential election. He skirted this obstacle by resigning from the position of acting president on 15 November, exactly a month after assuming that office. The presidential election, which was won emphatically by Japarov with a decisive 79 percent mandate, was accompanied by a referendum about the form of government in Kyrgyzstan — parliamentary or presidential. The constitutional changes that will follow in pursuance of the wide support for a presidential form of government will weaken the parliament and significantly cement the power of the executive. This would effectively end Kyrgyzstan’s democratic experiment and enable Japarov to serve as undisputed leader. According to political analyst Azim Azimov, “There are very few things on his resume that would support the claim that he is the most fit leader for the PM’s office or the president. However, he has very strong popular support, especially amongst traditional nationalist and very conservative rural people of Kyrgyzstan.”

Relations with neighbours

Russia expects Kyrgyzstan to stay committed to strategic partnership. It had shown that it was not happy with the change of leadership in Kyrgyzstan in the aftermath of the 4 October election. Moscow suspended US $100 million in financial aid to Kyrgyzstan. Kyrgyzstan’s new foreign minister, Ruslan Kazakbaev, who assumed this position on 14 October, rushed to Moscow on 23 October to meet Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to assure him and the Kremlin that the situation in Kyrgyzstan was returning to normal. The day before Kazakbaev met with Lavrov, President Putin called the situation in Kyrgyzstan a “tragedy” and said Russia had been watching with “pity and concern.” “I think current developments are a disaster for Kyrgyzstan and its people. Every time they have an election, they practically have a coup. This isn’t even funny,” Putin said.

It’s not only the political unrest that has dented relations. For almost five months, Kyrgyz importers have not been receiving many goods from China.

During the unrest that followed the elections, Chinese businesses were targeted for shakedowns nationwide, at times, even accompanied by violence. On 19 October, the External Security Commissioner at the Chinese Foreign Ministry summoned the Kyrgyz Ambassador in Beijing to express China’s displeasure. The Chinese in Bishkek have long felt that Kyrgyz officials “don’t care” enough to protect them. It’s not only the political unrest that has dented relations. For almost five months, Kyrgyz importers have not been receiving many goods from China. Chinese exports to Kyrgyzstan were down 44.7 percent in first three quarters of 2020. The United States released a statement saying Kyrgyz “citizens and their leaders must continue to fight against the influence of organised crime and corruption in politics.” Kazakh President Tokayev met Kyrgyz Foreign Minister in Nur-Sultan on 30 October. Tokayev said that Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan are countries most close to one another. “We are not divided by anything. Kyrgyzstan is a reliable ally, an important strategic partner, and brotherly state to Kazakhstan.” In an interview with Al Jazeera, Japarov acknowledged that several traditional allies have not been keen to cooperate with the new government. “Neighbours, the EU, and the US have doubts,” he said. “But we will prove ourselves by deeds, not words.” Several in the country remain unconvinced.

The way forward

Before the 10 January presidential vote, a fierce debate erupted in Kyrgyzstan whether it should revert to the presidential system of government. Some analysts felt that returning to a presidential system would set the country back 30 years and put it on the path to authoritarianism. It was felt that without independent courts or real freedom of speech, only a parliamentary system could keep the balance in Kyrgyzstan. Arkady Dubnov, a Central Asia expert in Moscow, noted that more upheaval was inevitable in Kyrgyzstan. “The way how the whole system of power in Kyrgyzstan was whipped and uprooted in just 48 hours shows how government institutions are unstable in this country,” he said.

It was felt that without independent courts or real freedom of speech, only a parliamentary system could keep the balance in Kyrgyzstan.

After announcement of the result, Japarov said Kyrgyzstan needs political stability now most of all. “I call on all opponents to unite; the minority should submit to the majority. I come to power during challenging times; there is a crisis everywhere,” Japarov said. Russian President Putin congratulated Japarov on his victory and expressed hope that the latter would promote strengthening of bilateral relations which, “serves the fundamental interests of our friendly people and is in line with strengthening stability and security in the Central Asian region.” Relations with China are also significant as it is the principal investor in Kyrgyzstan and the main lender owning about US$ 1.8 billion out of Kyrgyzstan’s US$ 4.8 billion foreign debt. Japarov and his predecessor both had sought a deferment of the debt payable to China in 2020. After much delay and anxiety for the Kyrgyz leadership, Beijing proposed a grace period that would see the 2020 payment of US$ 35 million pushed back to 2022-2024 — at a 2 percent interest rate. This would provide at least short-term support for a budget overstretched in responding to the pandemic and revenue shortfalls caused by the crisis.

After much delay and anxiety for the Kyrgyz leadership, Beijing proposed a grace period that would see the 2020 payment of US$ 35 million pushed back to 2022-2024 — at a 2 percent interest rate.

The decisive result of the presidential election and referendum on 10 January has provided a temporary relief to the people, businesses, and society in Kyrgyzstan. Japarov can be expected to rule in an authoritarian manner which will not be conducive to provide solutions to the deep-rooted economic, health, social, and ideological challenges confronting the nation. He will also have to contend with the innate anti-China sentiment amongst the people inter alia on account of the oppressive treatment of Kyrgyz people living in the East Turkestan (Xinjiang) region of China. However, the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, severe economic downturn, corruption, the steep north-south divide et al. will continue to plague the country in time to come.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.

Contributor

Ashok Sajjanhar

Ashok Sajjanhar

Amb. Ashok Sajjanhar has worked for the Indian Foreign Service for over three decades. He was the ambassador of India to Kazakhstan Sweden and Latvia ...

Read More +